From the Portland (Maine) Press Herald:
A judge who rules on disability cases for the Social Security Administration has sued the federal agency, accusing her supervisors of age and gender discrimination and retaliating against her for filing complaints about her treatment.
Administrative Law Judge Katherine Morgan, one of seven judges in the Office of Disability Adjudication and Review in Portland, said in the lawsuit filed Thursday in U.S. District Court in Portland that she was targeted by the office’s chief judge because of her age. She is 71.
Morgan, who has been a judge since 1994, filed a written complaint to her immediate supervisor, Chief Judge Guy Fletcher, after she was told on Dec. 11, 2013, that she was being targeted in an investigation by the Social Security Administration for her performance. The investigation focused on Morgan’s high production rate in deciding cases, for approving a high number of appeals and for attendance issues, according to the lawsuit.
“Chief Judge Fletcher repeatedly falsely accused Judge Morgan of time and attendance violations for documenting her time and attendance in exactly the same manner as the other judges, who were not accused,” the lawsuit says. ...
Morgan approved more appeals than any other judge in the Portland office. She approved 65 percent of disability claim appeals, dismissed 20 percent and denied 15 percent. She decided 148 cases from last Oct. 1 to March 11. ...
Karma
ReplyDeleteThey are complaining about a judge that approves 65% of cases? That is by no means an over approver. When are they going to investigate the judges that deny 90% of the cases?
ReplyDelete"When are they going to investigate the judges that deny 90% of the cases?"
ReplyDeleteIs this a rhetorical question, or do you really expect an agency that is under tremendous pressure to save money to actively seek ways to spend more?
@4:27
ReplyDeleteI was disturbed by the Congressional investigatory hearings and I viewed them as an attack on the integrity of the legal system. In my opinion, they came across as a thinly veiled attempt to achieve a political goal (cut government benefit programs for people with disabilities) by intimidating independent Administrative Judges.
If decision making accuracy was the goal, they would have looked just as carefully at the high denier outliers and worked at a system of accountability for both groups. They didn't. That sent a message: We don't care if you deny people with legitimate claims, but we'll persecute you if you approve more claims than we deem appropriate.
Sadly, judging from the precipitous drops in approval rates, that message was heard and heeded by many.
Let's add a little accuracy to this article.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, she has paid 96 out of 118 decisions through the end of February, a pay rate of 81.3% which is astoundingly and excessively high. Unfortunately, there are literally hundreds of ALJs whose pay rate exceeds this, so she clearly isn't getting targeted for this.
Second, no one is targeting her for "an excessively high" number of dispositions. As previously stated, she has only issued 118 decisions. This falls below the mean, and frankly is well behind the pace of the agency goal of 500 dispositions per year.
Age discrim? give me a break. There are hundreds of ALJs older than her.
I don't know anything about her personally or her situation, but I'd place big money that she was scamming with time/attendance.
I would bet that she pissed someone in management off or maybe someone who used to be in management hmm ... T&A is only used as the main source of an action when it is truly egregious. I am sure that this isn't the case here. No, I would say that she really pissed off someone in her office and they are targeting her. Judge Sax would do well to truly question her advisers, as they can be very vindictive and LIE when they feel they have to all while never signing their own name to a document. I really don't know how some people sleep at night.
ReplyDeleteHow would Anonymous at 12:27 have any information as to whether the judge's pay rate was "too high" for that period? What, exactly, do the merits of individual cases have to do with percentages? Logically fallacy--and it assumes that cases are assigned in blind rotation--don't bet on that. Moreover, we are not speaking of nationwide discrimination, but discrimination in that office, where she may well be the senior judge and the oldest or only woman. I lived that scenario, although I retired while the agency was shrieking when we denied claims. This is political. SHAME! SHAME!
ReplyDeleteNot only is this political, it is emblematic throughout ODAR, and includes all levels of employees. Managers are engaging in Unfair Labor Practices and Prohibited Personnel Practices at levels never before seen to either target employees they do not like personally, or those whose production numbers may not be in the Agency's established range - Quality of work be damned. What's worse, managers at the highest levels in the Agency, including Acting Commissioner Colvin, continue to reinforce and support these managers and turn a deaf ear to their repeated illegal conduct. This has led to numerous EEO cases against the Agency over the past several years, and SSA has a scathing reputation in its handling of EEO cases. (See Baltimore Sun, Sept. 18, 2014, "After Scathing Report, SSA Overhauls Its EEO Program"). Unfortunately, this "overhaul" has yet to occur. As long as the 'retirement bench' continues their undue influence over the highest level SSA officials, you will continue to see more and more of this.
ReplyDeleteI see a internal scandal coming with Social Security like it did with the VA...just a matter of time.
ReplyDeleteHow is she being targeted? What is her damage? Has she been suspended? reprimanded? any disciplinary action? Or is it just she isn't treated like royalty as she was the first 15 years of her ALJ career?
ReplyDeleteSounds like she's upset she actually has to show up for work to be held accountable by WebTA. Sounds like an old OHA Queen who doesn't wanted to be treated like an employee ... fails to realize she is no article 3 judge she is merely an article 1 federal employee no different than the SCT in the cubicle outside her office door.
Just show up / log in to webTA / copy and paste your DW pay instructions / pretend your a real lawyer / and collect your 150k pay check.
4:37 I think you are mistaken on quite a few issues, the first of which is that ALJs are not currently required to use WebTA. Secondly, you retort that she didn't have any problems for her first 15 years, begs the question WHY? is she having a problem now? That office has had its share of management problems, and no I am not going to air dirty laundry, but if there was no problem all those years, then what happened? What happened was that she pissed someone off and they are retaliating in the worst way possible, with abuse of authority.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure your right I'm not entirely familiar with the ins and outs of the judge contract to my knowledge the judges in my office are using webTA.
ReplyDeleteMy guess and yes its a guess as to why now when not before is because all those OHA years there was no accountability for judges they did whatever they wanted which caused things like Hunnington. Now ODAR mgmt views ALJs for what they are line employees. ALJs get but hurt when they're told they have to show up and are told they have to debone a certain number of chickens. Then they file frivilous lawsuits.
In regard to 6:05PM (March 22) above:
ReplyDelete"I see an internal scandal coming with Social Security like it did with the VA...just a matter of time."
You are correct! Obama did not renominate Colvin for Commissioner, and believe me there's a reason.
5:03, I am not an ALJ, but a "line employee" and I do not defend ALJs at the drop of a hat. However, the facts surrounding this case are very fishy. You sound like you don't like ALJs in general. I can actually understand why you may have that attitude towards them, believe me, I do. However, targeting a federal employee via innuendo and trumped up charges should never be tolerated no matter what their position. For shame as one poster said above and I will say it again, I don't know how some people sleep at night, especially when they live in glass houses.
ReplyDelete5:14, you are correct I generally don't like ALJs. I think they are grossly overpaid. Many have huge egos and again getting paid 150k to not practice law (OGC are the only attorneys that practice law in the agency) is ridiculous especially given the glut of unemployed lawyers that can and would do the job for half the salary. Not even unemployed most biglaw senior associates would take a 200k pay cut to "work" 40 hours a week and telecommute 10 days a month. ALJs should make 75k writers are paralegals they should all be gs-9s (I admit I am overpaid and feel badly about it), there should be no senior attorney position.
ReplyDeleteIf you don't need a westlaw account at work, you're not a lawyer.
They also don't have any accountability. No federal employee has enough accountability but an ALJ is near impossible to fire, no performance plans ect. I just don't understand why you can't help a writer out by typing instructions. Why must I have to decipher your chicken scratch in 2015. I decipher enough scratch on medical records. Seriously reading the handwriting of various professionals (judges, medical providers) is by far the most frustrating part of my job.
wow! I haven't seen a dose of JD envy that the vitriolic in a long time. I'm sure Charles is glad he could provide a public service for frustrated non-attorneys. Thanks for the laugh!
ReplyDelete8, I have a JD what makes you think I don't have a JD I think every writer in my office except one is an attorney.
ReplyDeleteSocial security report that if you are disabled for more than a year you cualify for banafit,I have been
ReplyDeletedisabled for almost four and they still refusing,
Social security state that they don't discriminate if you are white, Hispanic, black or any age but if you are betuing 20 true 45 they will make it inposible tu approve benefits,
Social security do not believe your conditions describe by a specialist ,instead they send you to their doctor that just ask questions with out looking at any test result and approve their diagnosis.
I believe the entire social security administration chuld be investigate
maybe I was confusing, I'm saying I'm an attorney doing paralegal work.
ReplyDeleteYou understand that if SSA didn't send you to someone other than your doctor your doctor would just write whatever you need them to so you keep coming to see them and the entire country would be on disability right?
ReplyDeleteThis system is probably messed up but we can't just take your doctor's word for it.
8:39 pm, if you hate your job and your fellow attorneys so much, why don't you move on? I would say there is more to this story. In any case, good luck finding happiness.
ReplyDeleteLet me inform you that primary doctor don't give permenant disabled letter this letter are given by specialist, in my case after two MRI, two CT scan, a phisicol therapist, bone specialist, pain management and a neurologist concluded that I'm disabled and they say I'm not, something is wrong with the social security administration and they should be investigate, I believe if people that are going thru the same problem should start complaining and going to their congressman and be persistent something will hapend cus something is wrong with social security administration.
ReplyDelete931, lol not much more. I don't hate all of my job all I'm saying is it isn't legal work and we're all overpaid. I have friends that make 30k less than me working 50-60 hours a week doing jury trials. Its pretty difficult to "move on" in the post 2008 law school graduation arena, jobs aren't there. Plus my experience is in SS what am I gonna do be a rep? no thx. Its a love/hate its a copy and paste boiler plate non lawyer job but I get to tell my family I'm an "attorney advisor" at SSA sounds legit. I get to sit at home 3 days a week to boot its not all bad, i graduated with people in a lot worse shape. But its not what anyone went to law school for when I retire I'll have never litigated a case never represented a client never been cited in a court reporter ect.. not exactly a dream legal career.
ReplyDelete10, sounds like a rough situation, could be more to the story, could have been bad luck of the draw getting a bad ALJ. But, this congress thinks we pay too many cases. They're much more likely to investigate ALJs paying to many cases not denying. A significant portion of this congress views the program as glorified welfare. You're fighting an uphill battle. appeal / reapply you might get approved before you die some do some don't.
The new HR (LMER/LRER in SSA-speak) rules that were initially rolled out in emergency situations (think Huntington and a certain NYC office) are now being rolled out to all of ODAR. From Bice's last email to everyone to all these IVTs that are mostly (if not entirely) for ALJs, it's clear the days of ALJs doing whatever they want are over.
ReplyDeleteSomeone earlier said ALJs are just SSA employees like everyone else--that is true and upper mgmt is finally getting the backbone and strong organization and detailed planning to treat them like it. The days of the king/queen ALJs doing as they please with their subjects are coming quickly to an end.
10:32 There are plenty of "real" attorneys who don't do jury trials. Working for SSA is the practice of law, I hate to break it to you. There are still plenty of legal jobs out there. Why wouldn't you become a rep? Frankly, I have had offers (I had to refuse and refuse to discuss)from some well established practitioners to go into private practice but I have it pretty good where I am and have plenty of self-respect as well as respect for the Judges. Frankly, I don't think you are an attorney at all. I think you are either a paralegal or a non-attorney GS, maybe even a SCT. Too much self-loathing going on. Whatever you are, for your sake, try to see the glass as half full. Nice chatting with you.
ReplyDelete@12:11 am
ReplyDeleteapparently only drafting decisions for Federal Court remands is the practice of law because our "paralegal" counterparts do (at least, the job description SSA got OPM to grade and let these folks get the same GS-12 says they do. In practice...) literally every other aspect of the decision writing job and I don't see UPL actions being tossed around.
Wait, what, does that mean the attorney reps aren't practicing law because non-attorneys do it?? Geesh, I guess they can all cancel their malpractice insurance. Thanks for the info.
ReplyDeleteHa, now that I would argue is the practice of law. Let's see--representing someone else's legal interests in a legal forum; presenting legal argument; cross-examining witnesses; giving advice re: the effects of certain actions--smells like the practice of law to me.
ReplyDeleteBut since SSA can waive the magic admin law wand and say taking part in their proceedings as a rep isn't the practice of law, it isn't! Abracadabra!
please. she is retaliating against him. she did exactly as she pleased for years and when she was told to cut back she got pissed off.
ReplyDeleteLets face it, in her age cohort there are not that many female judges. Further, there are plenty of male judges who have thumbed their noses at management and the law. Lastly, there are plenty of male judges in her very region who skip out during the day and don't sign out. They aren't told to "cut back". When any of these problem judgesare brought to management's attention by non-judge employees, they don't want to hear anything. In fact, management gets a little defensive especially the HOCALJs. She may be difficult and she may cause a lot of problems, but she is not doing anything different than at least 10 other male judges in her own region. I don't see anything happening to them. She is being targeted for being outspoken and putting up with their crap. Judge Sax should really take a good look at what is going on here. She is getting bad advice from people who live in glass houses.
ReplyDeleteShe causes lots of problems for attorneys and claimants never mind her office. The number of times I've had to tell clients you aren't getting a hearing today because she had another "emergency" is astounding. How about her sudden vacations? Or her habitual lateness? Not fun sitting with your client who is in pain when you are the first case of the day and week in and week out she is late.
ReplyDeleteFew facts. Lots of speculation. Probably a waste of time since the agency is impotent by choice or size to act.
ReplyDeleteSo, ALJ Katherine Morgan only filed a complaint About ALLEGED discrimination after being told that she would be the target of an investigation concerning her performance. There really are not many details here so it would be impossible to weigh the legitimacy from either party, but there does seem to be a lot of discussion concerning her documented time. If she can't properly manage her time than how would she expect some of her claimants who have severe impairments to do so successfully? I can say that she had given me an unfavorable decision on my appeal in 2011 and she did not appear to have reviewed all facts thoroughly or accurately. I did get the impression while waiting for my hearing to begin that was way past scheduled that she may have been reviewing my file for the first time.
ReplyDeleteI had a very good experience with ALJ Edward Gaulin In 2003. I'm thrilled that he has returned which I'm only now finding out about, and he's reported been back since 2012
ReplyDelete